Knowledge, Awareness, and Attitudes about Research Ethics among Dental Faculty in the Middle East: A Pilot Study
Table 4
Attitudes regarding research ethics committees (REC) and research ethics education: aggregate responses and association between responses and independent variables. Numbers represent percentages of respondents who “strongly agree” and “agree”.
Item
Aggregate (%)
KAU (%)
ASU (%)
Gender (%)
Academic position (%)
Prior ethics training (%)
Prior research (%)
Men
Women
Prof
Mid-level
Junior
Any Ethics Training
None
Any
None
(1) A research ethics committee would be helpful
91.2
92.0
90.0
94.4
88.4
100.0*
80.0
93.5
80.4
97.5**
91.0
91.2
(2) There is a need for a research ethics committee in each institution for ethical review of research
92.0
88.0
98.0
98.1
87.0
94.9
92.5
89.1
97.8
88.6
94.4
85.3
(3) Research with human subjects must be reviewed by a research ethics committee
94.4
90.7
100.0
96.3
92.8
94.9*
100.0
89.1
97.8
92.4
94.4
94.1
(4) Ethical review of research is only necessary for international collaborative research
19.2
14.7
26.0
14.8
23.2
30.8**
10.0
17.4
17.4
20.3*
20.2
17.6
(5) Ethical review of research by an REC is not necessary since there are scientific committees
9.6
10.7
8.0
7.4
11.6
10.3
5.0
13.0
6.5
11.4
5.6
20.6
(6) Ethical review of research by an REC would delay research and make it harder for the researcher
44.0
44.0
44.0
57.4*
31.9
41.0
57.5*
34.8
50.0*
40.5
44.9
44.1
(7) The members of a research ethics committee should receive training in research bioethics
92.8
90.7
96.0
87.0
97.1
94.9
90.0
93.5
100.0
88.6
89.9
100.0
(8) Research ethics should be taught as a mandatory postgraduate module
96.0
94.7
98.0
96.3
95.7
100.0
100.0
89.1
100.0
93.7
95.5
97.1
(9) All investigators should have some training in research ethics
